Traditionally seed planting occurred after the soil had been ploughed, typically inverted. Accordingly it was usual to make multiple passes over the same pieces of ground.
The above discussed method of farming resulted in destruction of the soil structure. This had a number of disadvantages including moisture loss and not optimising conditions for new growth and germination. The above issues were addressed by minimum tillage methods and machinery. An example of such machinery is described in Australian Patent 528237. The plough of Australian Patent 528237 was a deep tillage implement with a digging blade with a seeding assembly that followed.
Improvements in respect of the above discussed ploughs, are described in Australian Patents 541415, 640025, 675376 and 2007202357, as well as Australian Patent Applications 2011201476 and 2014218389.
The improved plough assemblies had a digging shank that formed a slot in the soil in the direction of travel of the plough. Following the digging shank, a closing tool engaged the soil and provided a seed bed. Following the closing tool, a seeding boot would deposit the seed on the seed bed. Most preferably, a fertiliser tube followed the digging blade so as to deposit fertiliser at a position below the seed bed.
More recently seeding assemblies have delivered seed in two rows, the rows being associated with a single digging shank that formed a central slot in the soil. The rows were displaced laterally with fertiliser deposited at the lower portion of the soil slot.
Dual row seeding equipment is described in U.S. Pat. Nos. 5,331,907, 5,396,851, 7,617,782, 7,685,951 and 6,955,131.
The general object of providing dual seed row planting was that it was more efficient to plant two rows rather than one for each part of a digging shank.
A disadvantage of known dual row planting equipment is that the soil area to which the seed is delivered is not well adapted to promote germination, promote new growth and maximise yield.